Godot Stop Project

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It doesn't state whether stop gracefully terminates the process, kills it forcibly, cleans up child processes, or has side effects like losing unsaved scene edits. Given this is a destructive/state-changing operation with zero annotation coverage, the transparency is notably lacking.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose. No wasted words or fluff. The reference to the sibling launch tool is efficiently integrated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a state-changing operation (stopping a running project) with no annotations and no output schema. Given the destructive nature, the description should disclose side effects, error conditions (e.g., what happens if no project is running), and confirmation requirements. It relies entirely on the sibling name for context, which is insufficient for safe usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so with schema coverage at 100% there is nothing for the description to add semantically. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool where no param documentation is needed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb+resource: 'Stop a project launched by godot_run_project.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and explicitly references its paired launch tool, distinguishing it from the restart sibling. It could be slightly more explicit about what 'stop' entails (graceful shutdown vs kill), but the purpose is clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The reference to 'a project launched by godot_run_project' implies the tool should be used on projects that were started via that sibling. It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or what alternatives exist (e.g., godot_restart_project for restart cycles), but the linkage to godot_run_project offers implicit usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.